NASW- Oklahoma Chapter 36th Annual State Conference
Norman, OK
March 26, 2012
The University of Oklahoma
Anne and Henry Zarrow School of Social Work
Knee Center for Strong Families
Presents:
Social Workers’ Family Values: Results of a Survey
Kenneth R. Wedel Ph.D., Coordinator
&
Annie Smith, Knee Scholar
Outline of Presentation
 The Knee Center for Strong Families
 Take the Family Values Survey
 The Importance of Values
 The Conflictual Nature of Values
 Values Defined
 Social Work on Values
 Family Values Defined (Review of Literature)
 Our Survey on Family Values
 Results
 Discussion and Wrap-up
The Knee Center for Strong Families
 Founded in 2009 through a bequest of Ruth Irelan and Junior
Koenig Knee
 Ruth Knee was an alumnus of the University of Oklahoma
School of Social Work and a pioneer in the advancement of
professional social work practice and interdisciplinary
engagement in social policy development
 The Knee Center was established to devote its work to
building theory, knowledge, practice, and education for the
development of strong families in their diverse forms
The Knee Center Mission
“The Knee Center for Strong Families is
dedicated to strengthening
families in Oklahoma through research,
service, policy, and practice.”
Ruth Irelan Knee
Overview of the Knee Center
The Knee Center is dedicated to sponsoring academic and
community-oriented programs in the fields of social work,
public health (including mental health), and fine arts in the
following three core areas:
1. Visiting lectureships, workshops, seminars, meetings of
scholars, conferences, symposia, and forums
2. Planning grants or “seed money” to develop programs that
might have continuous funding from other sources
3. Underwrite research on the planning and development of
educational programs to enhance family life in Oklahoma
Goals of the Knee Center
 Contribute new knowledge in quality of life for Oklahoma
families
 Foster collaboration for outreach activities directed toward solving
social problems for families
 Increase current research capacity (including evaluation research)
of the center’s faculty, investigators, and students through the
creation of research teams
 Increase the amount of externally funded training and research
grants conducted by the center by increasing the number of
investigator-initiated training and research grant submissions; and
developing multidisciplinary research teams to conceptualize,
plan, develop, and conduct service and research initiatives
Features of the Knee Center
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Collaborative civic engagement in areas in which strong family development
is an integral part of practice, including:

child welfare

law

family services

mental health

substance abuse recovery

health care/promotion
Curriculum innovation supporting the preparation of a new generation of
social workers and helping professionals
Building awareness among key constituencies and stakeholders of how policy
can support strong family development.
Development of new intervention models to advance strong family
development within Oklahoma and beyond
Formation of strong partnerships with state and local organizations and
groups to advance knowledge and practice of strong family development
Values
 Relate to what is important in our lives
 Abstract
 Beliefs tied to emotion, not objective ideas.
 Everybody possesses values
 Vary in degrees of importance
 Ordered by importance relative to one another
 System of ordered values makes us who we are
-Rokeach, 1979
The Importance of Values
 Values connect individuals to society:
• Help ease the conflict between individuals and collective
interests.
• Enable individuals to work together to realize collectively
desirable goals.
The Importance of Values (continued)
 Values:
 Serve as standards or criteria in terms of actions, policies,
people, and events
 Have an effect on aspects of choice, decisions regarding courses
of action and outcomes, goals, attitudes, and behavior
 Mold our beliefs and perceptions
The Conflictual Nature of Values
 The nature of values is often fraught with
conflict:
 Presumed to contain a right vs. wrong, good vs. bad
component
 Result in judgments of affirmation or condemnation
-Trotzer, 1981
Values Defined
 The concept of values is considered broad & encompasses
numerous definitions:
• Kluckholn and Stodtbeck (1961) – “Values answer basic
existential questions, helping to provide meaning in people’s
lives.”
• Building Family Values (2000)-“Values are a reflection of
who we are, of our culture, and of our own unique heritage.”
Values Defined (continued)
 Rokeach (1979)- “Values are core conceptions of
the desirable within every individual and society.
They serve as standards or criteria to guide not only
action, but judgment, choice, attitude, exhortation,
rationalization, and one might add, attribution of
causality.”
 Rokeach (1973)-“They (values) lead us to take
particular positions on social issues and they
predispose us to favor one ideology over another.”
Shaping Family Values
 All families possess values
 Generational transfer
 Vary with the diversity of families
 Factors shaping family values:
 Age
 Cohort, life-stage, physical
 Gender
 Experiences and life circumstances
 Social, political, and economic environment
 Cultural background
Changing Family Values
 Families and family values have changed in
American culture over the years:
• Thornton (1989)– Study examined changing values and norms
in regards to family life over a period of 30 years.
 Revealed changes in norms regarding marriage, childbearing, and the
roles of men and women.
 Similarity between family values and broader social trends.
Family Values From a Political
Perspective
 Family Values Rhetoric:
• The concept of family values is conflictual.
 Has subsequently been used as controversial political ammunition.
• Cahn and Carbone (2010)- Red Families v. Blue Families.
• Cloud (2010)-performed an extensive analysis of the
political use of the term family values.
 1992 Presidential Elections.
A Nation Divided: Red vs. Blue States
2008 Electoral Map
= Republican States
= Democratic States
Families on the Front Lines
“Families are on the front lines of the culture wars. Controversies over
abortion, same-sex marriage, teen pregnancy, single parenthood, and
divorce have all changed our images of the American family. Some
Americans seek a return to the ‘mom, dad, and apple pie’ families of the
1950s, while others embrace all of our families, including single
mothers, gay and lesbian parents, and cohabitating couples.These
conflicting perspectives on life’s basic choices affect us all-at the
national level, in state courts and legislatures, in drafting local
ordinances, and in our own families.”
-Cahn and Carbone (2010)- Red Families v. Blue Families.
Social Work on Values
NASW Code of Ethics :
 Identifies core values on which social work’s mission
is based.
 States:
 “They (social workers) should be aware of the any conflicts
between personal and professional values and deal with them
responsibly.”
 Should be aware of impact on ethical practice with clients
Survey Study on Family Values
Importance
 Little is known about family values espoused by social
workers and how these values might impact their practice
with families.
 Lack of research and literature surround family values of
social workers.
Survey Study on Family Values
Purpose
 In 2011, The Knee Center conducted an online survey of
National Association of Social Workers (NASW) – Oklahoma
Chapter members to obtain information about family values
and their priorities for professional practice.
Survey Study on Family Values
Purpose
 Study represents an initial look at family values of social
workers
 Important to examine how congruent they may be with those
of the individuals and families for whom they provide
services or administer policy practice.
 Focuses on one aspect of the profession’s core values that
addresses the importance of human relationships
 Purposeful efforts to promote, restore, maintain and enhance
the well-being of families.
Survey on Family Values : Methods
Participants and Sampling Procedure
 Research Survey Design
 Acquired a list of current 1,243 2010-2011 NASW-OK
members from the NASW-OK office
 Invitation to participate in study and link to online
questionnaire were e-mailed to a total of 973 members for
whom e-mail contact info was provided.
 3 separate mailings conducted
 22 e-mail addresses were nonfunctional
 Among the 951 members with valid e-mail addresses, 283
returned their questionnaires
 Response rate of 29%.
 Online survey administered using the Qualtrics software
Survey on Family Values : Methods
Survey Design and Variables
 First section of survey:
 Queried respondents with a 44, 9-point semantic differential
scale items
 Examined attitudes on different aspects of family values
 These items were anchored on each side with an “opposite”
value statement conveying opposing value preferences.
Survey on Family Values : Methods
Survey Design and Variables
• Example:
 Below are statements associated with domains of
family life. Please read each pair of statements and
indicate your degree of preference for one statement
over the other by clicking the appropriate
circle. Clicking a circle closer in proximity to one
statement would signify your preference for that
statement.
Survey on Family Values : Methods
Survey Design and Variables
 The second section of the questionnaire gathered data on a
number of respondent characteristics:
 Age
 Gender
 Degree level
 Years of practice
 Whether or not practice directly with families
 Practice Setting
 Marital status (whether or not previously or currently married)
 Whether or not have children
Sample Population:
Ages of Respondents
Sample Population:
Gender of Respondents
Sample Population:
Degree Level of Respondents
Sample Population:
Years Practiced in Profession
Sample Population:
Respondents Providing Direct Family Services
Sample Population:
Practice Setting
Sample Population:
Respondents Who Have Children
Sample Population:
Respondents Who Are Currently Married or Who
Have Been Previously Married
Survey on Family Values : Methods
Analyses
 A principal components analysis was conducted based on the
41 family values items.
 Used the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling
adequacy
 Assessed whether individual variables were appropriate for
inclusion in our principal components analysis
 Conducted several initial principal components analyses
 KMO measures for each included variable each time
 Systematically eliminated variables whose KMO measures were
under .50 until no such items remained
Survey on Family Values : Methods
Analyses: Principal Components Analysis
 Resulted in 6 common variables
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Support secular values (believe religion is not sole value source)
Support flexible family forms
Progressive values about sexuality
Pro-outside of family supports
Pro-Gun control/Intrusion of family
Support public programs
A principal components analysis with varimax rotation was
conducted based using these 6 factors
 Factors were named and factor scores for each respondent
were generated.
 One-way ANOVAs were conducted to examine relationships
between respondent characteristics and factor scores

Results:
Factor 1: Secular Values (Believe Religion Is Not Sole Value Source)
•Results of questions that correlated with factor:
•Question 9: Marriage with strict lifelong conditions (covenant marriage) vs. Marriage without strict
lifelong conditions (non-covenant marriage) = +
•Question 12: Parochial schools (schools with religious affiliations) vs. Secular schools (schools without
religious affiliations) = +
•Question 17: No active role of religion in child rearing vs. Active role of religion in child rearing = •Question 18: There should be no lifelong cohabitation outside of marriage vs. Lifelong cohabitation outside
marriage should be allowed = +
•Question 27: Religious values taught in schools vs. Religious values taught outside of schools = +
•Question 28: Pre-marital cohabitation should be allowed vs. No cohabitation before marriage should be
allowed = •Question 29: Creationism vs. Evolution = +
•Question 32: The Bible (or other religious texts) is the only adequate source for the teaching of values vs.
There are many different sectors for the teaching of values= +
•Question 37: Same-sex marriage should be recognized as equal vs. Same-sex marriage should not be
recognized as equal = •Question 38: No separation of church and state vs. Full separation of church and state = +
Results:
Number of Respondents
27. Religious values should always be taught in schools vs.
Religious values should always be taught outside of schools
Religious values taught in schools----Religious values taught outside of schools
Mean=6.5
Results:
Number of Respondents
32. The Bible (or other religious texts) is the only adequate
source for the teaching of values vs. There are many different
sectors for the teaching of values
The Bible (or other religious texts) for teaching values----Many different sectors for teaching values
Mean=7.5
Results:
Number of Respondents
18. Lifelong cohabitation should never be allowed outside of
marriage vs. Lifelong cohabitation should be allowed outside of
marriage
No lifelong cohabitation outside of marriage----Lifelong cohabitation outside of marriage
Mean=6.9
Results:
Number of Respondents
9. Marriage should only be allowed with strict lifelong conditions
(covenant marriage) vs. Marriage should only be allowed without
strict lifelong conditions (non-covenant marriage)
Marriage with strict lifelong conditions----Marriage without strict lifelong conditions
Mean=5.1
Results:
Number of Respondents
17. There should be no active role of religion in child-rearing vs.
There should always be an active role of religion in child-rearing
No active role of religion in child-rearing----Active role of religion in child-rearing
Mean=6.2
Results:
Factor 2: Support Flexible Family Forms
•Results of questions that correlated with factor:
•Question 19: Single parent families provide sufficient opportunities for children vs.
Single parent families do not provide sufficient opportunities for children= •Question 25: Individuals should only have children within wedlock vs. Individuals
should be free to have children outside of wedlock= +
•Question 26: Open marriage vs. Closed marriage = •Question 41: Pro-choice vs. Pro-life = -
Results:
Number of Respondents
19. Single parent families provide sufficient opportunities for
children vs. Single parent families do not provide sufficient
opportunities for children
Single parent families provide sufficient opportunities----Single parent families do not provide sufficient opportunities
Mean=4.1
Results:
Number of Respondents
25. Individuals should only have children within wedlock vs.
Individuals should be free to have children outside of wedlock
Should only have children only within wedlock----Free to have children outside of wedlock
Mean=5.5
Results:
Number of Respondents
41. Pro-choice vs. Pro-life
Pro-choice----Pro-life
Mean=3.5
Results:
Factor 3: Progressive Values About Sexuality
•Results of questions that correlated with factor:
•Question 31: Sex education should be allowed within schools and other venues vs.
Sex education should only be allowed in the family= +
•Question 33: Family planning is preferred vs. Family planning is not preferred = +
•Question 35: No parental consent should be required for access to birth control
devices or drugs (open access) vs. Parental consent should be required for access to
birth control devices or drugs (restricted access) = +
Results:
Number of respondents
33. Family planning is preferred vs. Family planning is not
preferred
Family planning is preferred ---- Family planning is not preferred
Mean= 1.9
Results:
Number of Respondents
31. Sex education should be allowed within schools and other
venues vs. Sex education should be allowed only within the
family
Sex education within schools and other venues ----Sex education only within the family
Mean=2.2
Results:
Factor 4: Pro-Outside of Family Supports
•Results of questions that correlated with factor:
•Question 10: Elder care should only occur within the family vs. Elder care may occur
outside of the family= +
•Question 11: The teaching of values to children should occur only in the home vs. The
teaching of values to children may occur in venues outside of the home= +
•Question 23: Women with young children should stay at home vs. Women with young
children should be free to work outside of the home= +
Results:
Number of Respondents
10. Elder care should only occur within the family vs. Elder care
may occur outside of the family
Elder care only within the family----Elder care may occur outside of the family
Mean= 6.6
Results:
Number of Respondents
11. The teaching of values to children should occur only in the
home vs. The teaching of values to children may occur in
venues outside of the home
The teaching of values to children only in the home----The teaching of values to children outside of the home
Mean=6.4
Results:
Factor 5: Pro-Gun Control/Intrusion On Family
•Results of questions that correlated with factor:
•Question 13: No corporal punishment of children should be permitted vs. Corporal
punishment of children should be permitted = •Question 39: Gun control vs. No gun control= •Question 44: It is acceptable to have firearms in a household with children vs. It is not
acceptable to have firearms in a household with children = +
Results:
Number of Respondents
44. It is acceptable to have firearms in the household with
children vs. It is not acceptable to have firearms in the
household with children
Firearms in the household with children----No firearms in the household with children
Mean=5.5
Results:
Number of Respondents
39. Gun control vs. No gun control
Gun control----No gun control
Mean=3.0
Results:
Factor 6: Support Public Programs
•Results of questions that correlated with factor:
•Question 20: Social services for families should only be from private providers vs.
Social services for families should only be from public providers= +
•Question 30: The family should be responsible for the long-term care of their elderly
family members vs. The government should be responsible for the long-term care of
elderly family members = +
Results:
Number of Respondents
20. Social services for families should only be from private
providers vs. social services should only be from public
providers
Social services for families from private providers----Social services for families from public providers
Mean= 5.2
Results:
Social Work Respondents As A Group
 On each of the six items, the mean responses were closer to
the value statement conveying progressive attitudes.
 Overall, it is clear that the NASW responding sample has
distinctly progressive attitudes.
Results:
Differences Among Respondents
 Study adapted an exploratory approach in its analyses.
 Hence, ANOVAs were run using each respondent characteristic variable




as a group (independent) variable and each factor score as a dependent.
Though results differ for the different components, a basic trend is clear:
The youngest group of respondents is often quite traditional in its
attitudes
The oldest group is often quite progressive
Only age group showed consistent statistically significant associations
with factor scores:
 Secular values (believe religion is not sole value source)
 In support of outside family support
 Pro-gun control
Results:
Older Respondents vs. Younger Respondents: ProChoice vs. Pro-Life
Question 41: Pro-Choice vs. Pro-Life
Results:
Older Respondents Tend to Orient More Towards
Secular Values
Question: 32 : The Bible (or other religious texts) is the only source of values vs. There are many different
sectors for teaching values
Results:
Older Respondents Tended to More Highly Prefer Elder
Care Provided Outside the Family
Question 10: Elder care should occur only within the family vs. Elder care may occur outside of the family
References
Building Family Strengths: Values. (2000, March). Clemson Extension: Family Relationships. Retrieved from:
http://virtual.clemson.edu/groups/psapublishing/PAGES/FYD/FL523.pdf
Cahn, N. & Carbone, J. (2010). Red Families v. Blue Families: Legal Polarization and the Creation of Culture. New York, NY:
Oxford University Press.
Cloud, D. (1998). The rhetoric of <family values>:Scapegoating, utopia, and the privatization of social responsibility.
Western Journal of Communication, 62(4), 387-419. Retrieved from EBSCOhost database.
National Association of Social Workers. (approved 1996, revised 2008). Code of Ethics of the National Association of Social
Workers. Retrieved from http://www. naswdc.org /pubs/code/code.asp
Rokeach, M. (1973). The Nature of Human Values. New York, NY: The Free Press.
Rokeach, M. (1979). Understanding HumanValues: Individual and Societal. New York, NY: The Free Press.
Schwartz, S. H. (2006). Basic human values: Theory, measurement, and applications. Revue
française de sociologie.
Thornton, A. (1989). Changing Attitudes toward Family Issues in the United States. Journal of Marriage and Family,
51(4), 873-893. Retrieved from http://www. jstor.org/stable/
353202
Trotzer, J.P. (1981). The Centrality of Values in Families and Family Therapy. International Journal of Family Therapy, 3(1),
42-55. doi:0148-8384/81/1300-0042$00.95
Discussion and Wrap-Up
 Thank You!
 Questions?